“Eternals” has been described as boring. This sentiment has been echoed frequently, with a Rotten Tomatoes critic score of 47% and the lowest audience rating of any Marvel Cinematic Universe film. However, in my opinion, this criticism is only partially accurate, because being slow and being boring are two different things.
Director Chloé Zhao captured the characters using natural light and on-location shooting, much like in her film *Nomadland*. And she poses the question: Why does God simply watch human tragedy unfold? This question, presented at a deliberate pace, completely diverged from the expectations of audiences who anticipated a Marvel-style blockbuster, and from the director’s intention to offer a mythological meditation. This discrepancy seems to be causing discomfort.
The actors worked quietly within that awkwardness, drawing out emotions that could not be expressed through dialogue, using gestures and expressions. Ma Dong-seok‘s scene of caring for Tena, Jemma Chan‘s subtle anxiety, and Barry Keoghan‘s profound silence. Thanks to what they conveyed, this film went beyond simply being “slow.”
“Eternals” is a film where the official stance of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) clashed with the director’s vision. This clash may appear as a weakness, but it is, in fact, the film’s most honest aspect.
What “Eternals” is really asking
This film is the MCU movie that most honestly poses the question, “Why does God only watch tragedy?” The awkwardness that arises from the conflict with the blockbuster formula actually makes the question more memorable.
Seres lives for 7,000 years. During that long time, she has witnessed human wars. She has only watched the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the deaths of millions. This is because there was a rule set by the creator of the universe, Celestial, that she must not interfere in conflicts between humans. That command was absolute.
However, Ceres came to love humanity. And she learned the truth: that the humanity she believed she was protecting was, in fact, an egg intended to incubate new life for the Celestials, and that when that egg hatched, the Earth would be destroyed. Ceres is forced to choose between the Creator’s command and the object of her love. Is it duty, or love?
This is what the film is really asking. Can one reject the purpose for which one was made? What price must one pay for defying God’s command? What choices did the director make to bring those questions to the screen?
Choosing to photograph myths using natural light
Director Zhao’s decision was correct. The use of natural light during the “golden hour” and on-location filming brought the surreal myth to life, making it feel like a documentary of the present. This is why the story feels so weighty.
In every important dialogue scene in the film, Zhao inserted golden light just before sunset. The light that falls on the characters’ faces as they speak seems to embody the weight of another world. This choice was enhanced by the production design, which was filmed in actual locations resembling ancient places like Babylon, rather than on a digital screen. This is why, despite being a mythical story, it doesn’t feel fabricated.
The typical visuals in Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) films are often artificial. Using computer-generated backgrounds to create powerful action sequences can result in something that is both visually impressive and unreal. “Eternals” chose a different approach. By portraying a cosmic myth under the light of reality, the film made this question feel more grounded. This is the essence of its weight.
So, who is responsible for carrying the weight of this video? It is the actors.
10 people rescued within 156 minutes, by the actors
The ten Eternals, each with their own background and past, and the love and conflict between them. Trying to fit this immense amount of material into two and a half hours, there was no choice but for the dialogue to increase. This is how Marvel usually does things. However, the actors in this film filled that shortcoming with quiet scenes.
Observe the scene where Ma Dong-seok cares for Thena (Angelina Jolie). There is not a single line of dialogue. We only see Gilgamesh smiling as he takes out a pie, and Thena’s mental illness improving as he stays by her side. In that scene, hundreds of years pass. The depth of emotion conveyed solely through body language and facial expressions takes the place of lengthy explanatory dialogue.
Barry Keoghan’s Druig and Brian Tyree Henry’s Phastos are prime examples. They are beings who have experienced human violence and love for thousands of years. They convey the depth of these experiences solely through their vocal tone and gaze. Gemma Chan is also remarkable. The subtle emotional shifts, from Cersei’s anxiety and vulnerability to the moment of decision, are all conveyed through her expressions, not through dialogue.
Even Kumail Nanjiani’s comedic role in *The King* is not lighthearted. He conveys a sense of loneliness hidden beneath the vanity of being a Bollywood actor, all with a single expression.
Thanks to the actors’ ability to compensate for the script’s shortcomings through their performances, this film avoids being just another film that relies too heavily on exposition. So, how should we interpret the common criticism that *Eternals* is “boring”?
“It’s boring” – this criticism is only half right
It is true that “Eternals” is slow-paced. However, being slow is different from being boring. This film creates discomfort when the audience expects the pace of a blockbuster, while the director aims for a mythological meditation, and these expectations clash.
The numbers speak for themselves. Critics gave it a 47% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, making it the first MCU film to receive the “Rotten Tomatoes” rating. However, the CinemaScore, based on audience feedback on the opening day, was a B, and the market research firm PostTrak gave it a 78% positive rating. This means that general audiences were much more lenient than the critics. Some critics even went so far as to say that it was “the first MCU film in 10 years that actually felt like a movie.”
Compared with “Shang-Chi,” you can see what this is. It is a new MCU superhero film released in the same year, 2021. Both pose the same question: “Can one reject their parents’ legacy?” “Shang-Chi” easily addressed this question through wuxia and fast-paced action. It benefited from word of mouth and grossed $223 million in North America. “Eternals” addressed the same question in a mythological, meditative way. That very difference is why it failed to match the pace audiences expect in theaters.
So, did this movie ultimately fail?
So, how should we view the common criticism that “Eternals” is “boring”? In my opinion, this is a superficial assessment.
A conflict with the official MCU is, in fact, a sign of integrity
The awkwardness in “Eternals” is not a weakness, but rather an honest aspect of the film. The director did not glorify the moment when the characters defy a divine command with flashy action sequences. No one achieves victory.
Look at Icarus. He betrayed Ajak, who stood on the side of Circe and humanity. Overwhelmed by guilt, Icarus flies towards the sun and takes his own life. The plot resolves too quickly, without sufficiently establishing the motivation for his betrayal. However, this haste itself conveys the desperation of his guilt. Typically, in a Marvel film, Icarus would have to atone for his sins in a final confrontation and return as a hero. But this film does not follow that pattern.
Sprite is also the same. She is a girl who did not side with humanity, unlike Icarus. The being that was eternally trapped in a child’s body receives the gift of becoming human. In exchange, she gives up the special ability of never growing up. The gains and losses are balanced.
Seres saves the Earth. She solidifies Tiamut, who awakened by absorbing the power of all the Eternals, into stone, preventing the Earth’s destruction. This is a choice made for the sake of humanity, but the price is Aeri’s judgment. She becomes a criminal instead of a hero. This is the opposite of the usual satisfaction that Marvel provides. Superhero movies usually end with victory. This movie ends with a question. And that discomfort is what makes this movie a “thought-provoking” blockbuster, rather than just simple entertainment.
“Eternals is boring.” I’ve heard this said a lot. A 47% critics’ score on Rotten Tomatoes, and the lowest audience rating in MCU history. But in my view, this criticism is only half right, because being slow is not the same as being boring.
Director Chloé Zhao, like in “Nomadland,” captured the characters using natural light and on-location shooting. And she asks: Why does God simply watch human tragedy unfold? This question, posed at a deliberate pace, completely diverged from the expectations of audiences who were anticipating a Marvel-style blockbuster, and from the director’s intention to offer a mythological meditation. This discrepancy seems to be causing discomfort.
The actors worked quietly within that awkwardness. They drew out, through gestures and expressions, emotions that could not be captured in dialogue. The scene of Ma Dong-seok caring for Thena, Gemma Chan’s subtle anxiety, and Barry Keoghan’s profound silence. Thanks to what they brought to the surface, the film went beyond simply being “slow.”
“Eternals” is a film where the official stance of the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) clashed with the director’s vision. This clash may appear as a weakness, but it is, in fact, the film’s most honest aspect.
This is the part that surprised me the most. Marvel typically reinforces the clichés of superhero stories. Characters seek revenge in the next film if they are defeated, and failures serve as setups for future opportunities. However, “Eternals” rejects these clichés.
This is the part that surprised me the most. Marvel typically reinforces the clichés of superhero stories. Defeat leads to revenge in the next film, and failure sets the stage for future opportunities. “Eternals” is the only MCU film that rejects these clichés.
This is the most significant difference from Marvel. In typical Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) films, a hero who commits wrongdoing ultimately restrains themselves in the final confrontation and returns to being a hero. “Eternals” completely rejects this cliché. No one wins. Only questions remain.
What “Eternals” is really asking
This film is the MCU movie that most honestly poses the question, “Why does God only watch tragedy?” The awkwardness that arises from the conflict with the blockbuster formula actually makes the question more memorable.
Ceres lives for 7,000 years. During that long time, she has witnessed human wars. She has only observed the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and the deaths of millions. This is because there was a rule set by the creator of the universe, Celestial: to not interfere in conflicts between humans. That command was absolute.
However, Ceres came to love humanity. And she learned the truth: that the humanity she believed she was protecting was, in fact, an egg intended to incubate new life for the Celestials, and that when that egg hatched, the Earth would be destroyed. Ceres is forced to choose between the Creator’s command and the object of her love. Is it duty, or love?
This is what the film is really asking: Can one reject the purpose for which one was made? What price must one pay for defying God’s command? What choices did the director make to put that question on screen?
Choosing to photograph myths using natural light
Director Zhao’s decision was correct. The use of natural light during the “golden hour” and on-location filming brought the surreal myth to life, making it feel like a documentary of the present. This is why the story feels so weighty.
In every important dialogue scene in the film, Zhao inserted the golden light just before sunset. The light that falls across the characters’ faces as they speak conveys the weight of another world.
Shooting at actual ancient locations like Babylon, rather than on a digital screen, completed this choice.
The typical visuals in Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) films are often artificial. Using computer-generated backgrounds to create powerful action sequences can result in something that is both visually impressive and unreal. “Eternals” chose a different approach. By portraying a cosmic myth under the light of reality, the film made this question feel more grounded. This is the essence of its weight.
So, who is responsible for carrying the weight of this video? It is the actors.
10 people rescued within 156 minutes, by the actors
Ten Eternals, each with their own backgrounds and pasts, along with the love and conflicts between them. Trying to fit all that into two and a half hours, there was no choice but to increase the dialogue. This is Marvel’s usual way. But the actors in this film made up for that shortcoming with quiet scenes.
Observe the scene where Ma Dong-seok cares for Thena (Angelina Jolie). There is not a single line of dialogue. We only see Gilgamesh smiling as he takes out a pie, and Thena’s mental illness improving as he stays by her side. In that scene, hundreds of years pass. The depth of emotion conveyed solely through body language and facial expressions takes the place of lengthy explanatory dialogue.
Barry Keoghan’s Druig and Brian Tyree Henry’s Phastos are prime examples. They are beings who have experienced human violence and love for thousands of years. They convey the depth of these experiences solely through their vocal tone and gaze. Gemma Chan is also remarkable. The subtle emotional shifts, from Cersei’s anxiety and vulnerability to the moment of decision, are all conveyed through her expressions, not through dialogue.
Even Kumail Nanjiani’s role as Kingo, responsible for the humor, is not lighthearted. He portrays a Bollywood actor whose vanity hides a deep loneliness, a performance he delivers with great enjoyment, yet a fleeting moment reveals this truth. The audience understands this without any explicit explanation. Thanks to the actors conveying the lack of dialogue through their physical performances, this film avoids being just another film with excessive exposition.
So, how should we interpret the common criticism that “Eternals” is “boring”?
“It’s boring” – this criticism is only half right
It is true that “Eternals” is slow-paced. However, being slow is different from being boring. This film creates discomfort when the audience expects the pace of a blockbuster, while the director aims for a mythological meditation, and these expectations clash.
The numbers speak for themselves. Critics gave it a 47% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, making it the first MCU film to receive the “Rotten Tomatoes” rating. However, the CinemaScore, based on audience feedback on the opening day, was a B, and the market research firm PostTrak gave it a 78% positive rating. This means that general audiences were much more lenient than the critics. Some critics even went so far as to say that it was “the first MCU film in 10 years that actually felt like a movie.”
Compared with 〈Shang-Chi〉, you can see what this is. It is a new MCU hero film released in the same year, 2021. Both pose the same question: “Can one reject their parents’ legacy?” 〈Shang-Chi〉 made this question accessible through wuxia and fast-paced action. It spread by word of mouth among audiences and grossed $223 million in North America. 〈Eternals〉 addressed the same question in a mythological, contemplative way. That very difference is why it did not match the pace audiences expected in theaters.
So, did this movie ultimately fail?
A conflict with the official MCU is, in fact, a sign of integrity
The awkwardness in “Eternals” is not a weakness, but rather an honest aspect of the film. The director did not glorify the moment when the characters defy a divine command with flashy action sequences. No one achieves victory.
Look at Icarus. He betrayed Ajak, who stood on the side of Circe and humanity. Overwhelmed by guilt, Icarus flies towards the sun and takes his own life. He flies towards the sun without having sufficiently built up the motivation for his betrayal. However, the very haste with which he does so conveys a sense of desperate guilt. In a Marvel movie, Icarus would have to redeem himself in the final battle and return as a hero. This movie does not follow that pattern.
Sprite is also the same. She is a girl who did not side with humanity, unlike Icarus. The being that was eternally trapped in a child’s body receives the gift of becoming human. In exchange, she gives up the special ability of never growing up. The gains and losses are balanced.
Sersi saves the Earth. She takes the power of all the Eternals into her body and turns the awakening Tiamut to stone, preventing the destruction of Earth. It is a choice made for the sake of humanity, but the price is Arishem’s judgment. She becomes a sinner instead of a hero. Superhero movies usually end in victory. This film ends by leaving us with a question. That discomfort is what makes this film a thought-provoking blockbuster.
Overall assessment
“Eternals” is neither a Marvel film nor Chloé Zhao’s “Nomadland.” There is a certain integrity within its discomfort.
This film consistently addresses the question of why God only watches human tragedies, all within the framework of a blockbuster. This is something to be commended.
156 minutes is a long time. The slow pace can be uncomfortable, and the motivation for Icarus’s betrayal is not adequately explained.
However, the weight of the visuals and the questions raised, along with the actors’ subtle performances, compensate for these shortcomings.
This film is recommended for those who want to experience mythology in a visual format. If you enjoy watching films at a slower pace, like “Nomadland,” this is even more suitable.
If you’re looking for something “different” among Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) films, this is the answer. Ma Dong-seok’s “K-slap” action sequences are intentionally included, and the boxing-based movements are of a high level.
If you are expecting a lighthearted action movie, you will be disappointed. If you want a heroic story that ends with a clear “victory,” it is best to avoid this film.
If the 156-minute runtime seems daunting, consider carefully before watching it.
If you have seen “Nomadland,” you can appreciate the director’s unique perspective. Instead of focusing on the technical aspects, pay attention to how each character defies their “intended purpose.” Be aware that Ma Dong-seok has a relatively small role, so you won’t be disappointed.
There are two films to be discussed next. First, “Nomadland.” It shares the same director, and the way it portrays the relationship between natural light and the characters is precisely the same. Then, there’s “Shang-Chi.” This Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) film tackles the same question – “rejecting one’s parental legacy” – but in a completely different way. When viewed side-by-side, it becomes clearer why each film was made the way it was, and what each gained and lost through those choices.
Next, we will look at the film “Nomadland.” It is a previous work by the same director, and the way it portrays the relationship between natural light and the characters is exactly the same.
Then, let’s consider “Shang-Chi.” This Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) film addresses the same question – “rejecting one’s heritage” – but in a completely different way. When viewed side-by-side, it becomes clear what each film gains and what it loses through its respective choices.
While watching this movie, I sat still, and even after the end credits began to roll, I couldn’t bring myself to leave my seat. It wasn’t because it was a short film, but because the weight of the visuals felt like it was tearing at me. That is what a good film does.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Is this movie based on a true story?
No, it is not. It is a fictional film based on the 1976 Marvel Comics work, “Eternals.” The main characters are 10 immortal beings sent by the creator of the universe, the Celestials, to protect humanity.
Can it be watched even if you haven’t seen the MCU?
It can be watched without any prior knowledge. This movie can be understood independently if you only know that it is set as a new beginning after “Avengers: Endgame.” However, some existing characters from the MCU are mentioned in the middle, so if you are curious about those connections, it is a good idea to look them up beforehand.
Does Ma Dong-seok have a long role?
He exits the story midway. He appears in depth only in the first half of the film, and his screen time decreases as the film progresses. This can be seen even in the trailer, so it is likely that viewers will feel that his role is insufficient. Nevertheless, his action scenes and the scenes where he cares for Tena (Angelina Jolie) are impressive.
Is 2.5 hours a long time?
It is a long piece. However, for those who can tolerate a slow pace, its length may feel less like a burden and more like an opportunity for contemplation. While those who want to quickly grasp the mythical narrative may find it frustrating, those who enjoy slowly reading the meaning of scenes without dialogue, and the nuances of characters and settings, will find it worthwhile.
Is there a sequel?
A mid-credits scene in the film hints that the story will continue. However, as of now, there has been no official announcement of a sequel. It remains unclear how the next phase of the Marvel Cinematic Universe will connect with the Eternals.
